Survey: AHDI Credential Renaming
The
AHDI Credentialing Development Team (CDT) is the governing body
responsible for policy development and oversight of all AHDI
credentialing programs. The CDT operates independently of the National
Leadership Board.
In response to the recent rebranding of the medical transcription practitioner to Healthcare Documentation Specialist (HDS), the CDT is exploring new names for the credentials Certified Medical Transcriptionist and Registered Medical Transcriptionist. We are seeking your input on the renaming of the credential.
Jay Vance recently wrote, "One of the driving motivations behind AHDI's move to "rebrand" medical transcriptionists as Healthcare Documentation Specialists is the critical need to remind the broader medical field that our practitioners are indeed an important part of the overall healthcare documentation process." To this end, it is important that our credential names indicate the level of expertise reflected in the attainment of each credential, and in a broader sense, convey the specialized knowledge and expertise required for the accurate capture of each patient's Health Story. In addition, the credential names should encompass traditional and emerging roles, including transcriptionists, quality assurance specialists, speech recognition editors, team leaders, analysts, encoders, abstractors, trainers, and educators.
When evaluating your responses, please consider the following descriptions:
In response to the recent rebranding of the medical transcription practitioner to Healthcare Documentation Specialist (HDS), the CDT is exploring new names for the credentials Certified Medical Transcriptionist and Registered Medical Transcriptionist. We are seeking your input on the renaming of the credential.
Jay Vance recently wrote, "One of the driving motivations behind AHDI's move to "rebrand" medical transcriptionists as Healthcare Documentation Specialists is the critical need to remind the broader medical field that our practitioners are indeed an important part of the overall healthcare documentation process." To this end, it is important that our credential names indicate the level of expertise reflected in the attainment of each credential, and in a broader sense, convey the specialized knowledge and expertise required for the accurate capture of each patient's Health Story. In addition, the credential names should encompass traditional and emerging roles, including transcriptionists, quality assurance specialists, speech recognition editors, team leaders, analysts, encoders, abstractors, trainers, and educators.
When evaluating your responses, please consider the following descriptions:
The RMT exam
is designed to assess competency in medical transcription by
determining if a candidate has the core knowledge and skills needed to
practice medical transcription effectively in today's healthcare
environment.
The CMT exam is designed to assess competency in medical transcription by determining if a candidate has the core knowledge and skills needed to practice medical transcription effectively in a multispecialty acute-care facility, where variable specialties, document types, and difficulty of dictation necessitate an advanced level of clinical knowledge and interpretive ability.
The CMT exam is designed to assess competency in medical transcription by determining if a candidate has the core knowledge and skills needed to practice medical transcription effectively in a multispecialty acute-care facility, where variable specialties, document types, and difficulty of dictation necessitate an advanced level of clinical knowledge and interpretive ability.
You may also want to refer to AHDI's Model Job Descriptions.
Take the survey now. Survey will be open April 17 through May 1
Take the survey now. Survey will be open April 17 through May 1
Tina Wilson
Programs Coordinator
Association for Healthcare Documentation Integrity (AHDI)
Programs Coordinator
Association for Healthcare Documentation Integrity (AHDI)
Visit us at: www.ahdionline.org
How can we "re-brand" something that has never been properly branded? To borrow a phrase read on facebook, we now need to promote ourselve as the dragon-slayers. Let's stop telling each other how cool we are and tell people who are willing to pay for the service.
Well, for what it's worth, I took the survey. My comment there also serves as my comment here: "Candidly? Other than the first choice, I hate them all for various reasons; cumbersome, confusing, and even tortuous language in one case ('integritist'? Seriously? WTH does that even mean? I'm afraid the rest of the HC documentation community, which we're supposedly trying to convince of our continued relevance to the process, would find that a joke at best; I certainly do). I'd be in favor of keeping it even simpler than this; HDS-R and HDS-C. (Which, if we still have fellows, means they'd neatly follow as HDS-F, unless the fellows are in love with having the maximum amount of initials possible after their names). Since this wasn't an option, I did the best I could with this."
Like the previous poster, I'm not sure where that word "integrist" even came from. Everything I can find online links it to integrism, which seems to have a pretty consistent definition: Today it is used as a pejorative to describe those who adhere to traditional Catholicism. These include those who separate the Holy See from the governance of Catholic faith, especially where it concerns the Latin Mass and reject what since 1970 is the normative form of the Mass in favor of the Mass of the 1962 Missal (which is recognized as an extraordinary form of the Roman Rite), but the term also is used toward some who believe and practice other forms of traditional Catholicism.
I don't see that fitting here at all. I really don't see one that I like and at the point that the credential is changed, I'll seriously rethink renewing mine because I believe the choices and the selection of the word "healthcare" waters down what we do and the knowledge we have. Yet it is what the board selected, so it's what we have to deal with. Still, I'd prefer to not have another credential that has to be explained and is way too vague to speak to knowledge. I'd rather be without one and choose what I call myself.
I will repost my comment here as well: Anything with 'dip' or 'dis' in the acronym needs to be abolished this instant.
I agree with all of the previous comments...integritist, really? It is telling me this word is misspelled, as were the other spellings I attempted. Sad, just sad.
Throw out "integritist" and all those using "integrity".
@Anonymous April 20 1:24: I believe you searched on the incorrect spelling of the word. Not "integrist" but "integritist".
@Anonymous April 19 12:30 Hyphen -R will most likely be needed to designate a retired credential. CHDS-F (or -F attached to the credential name) is not appropriate for a fellow. A fellow is a person that has volunteered in various capacities within the association and within the community. Traditionally, the fellow designation is tied to the association's name that issues it, not the credential.
The industry and the employers are hard enough on us. Why do we have to beat up on each other so? It's OK to disagree or not like something, but why do opinions have to be accompanied by an insult or a snide remark? The fact that we hate on each other (publicly) certainly doesn't help change the industry for the better. We have no power to effect change as long as we are tearing each other down.
Laura, with respect, I don't see that anyone is being beaten up. I'd be willing to bet that the responses above concerning the term "integritist" (which I also find eye-rollingly absurd, to be honest) actually reflect what we'd be likely to hear from the industry and employers. "You're a -- what?" "A certified integritist". Head scratch. Therein lies the reason behind the snark.
I've come around to "rebranding" myself as a Healthcare Documentation Specialist; I see the appropriateness of it. I am also certified. Therefore, for the sake of continuity, I should be a CHDS. It's the KISS principle at work, folks.
The feedback here, so far, reflects the recognition among MTs that our perception in the industry at large needs to change for the better -- and for what we bring to the table as professionals to be taken seriously. An odd-sounding and frankly weird credential designation isn't going to move things in that direction.
Want to talk about tearing down? If for some unfathomable reason our credentials end up as "integritists", in my opinion this -- all by itself -- has potential to tear down some hard-won ground in the uphill battle to change how we're perceived in this industry, and we're not exactly in a position (as a profession) to afford any more marginalization than we already face.
The appellation is that laughable, and deserves every bit of snark that's been expressed here, though not directed at anyone personally. It was a poor choice, perhaps a well-meant attempt to bring in a piece of our organization's title, that creates confusion instead of clarity. Thank goodness others were proposed.
One final thought: If we can't engage in discussions that include passionate disagreement and strong opinions without being called out as hating on each other, then we might as well hang it up right here and now, and go join AHIMA as red-headed stepchildren if they'll have us. (That, BTW, was pure snark; no disrespect intended to either AHDI or AHIMA. Or redheads, or stepchildren, for that matter.)
I'll put it in rustic terms: This ain't no ladies' tea, folks. This is our profession, our livelihood, and we cannot afford to stifle any voices that care enough to respond and get involved regardless of how we feel about their choices of words. They're showing up, and speaking up. I may not agree with everything they say, but I'm mighty glad to see them. I don't perceive any intentional insults above, but even if I did, it beats a "who cares?" crickets-chirping lack of response by a mile. JMO, YMMV.
Hi Mona,
Thanks for contributing to the conversation. I do appreciate your frankness and your passion. Maybe I was in the wrong state of mind when I read the first few posts, and I guess I had in mind some other posts that I had seen around the Internet about the name change. As is usually the case, there have been some snarky comments made. Taking into consideration the comments placed here, my response does seem like an overreach.
The people on the committee that brainstormed the suggested credential names were equally as passionate and concerned about the perception of our credentials and really wanted to our credential name to convey our unique abilities. I don't want those who volunteer and step out of their comfort zone to feel like they are going to be ridiculed for their opinions. In this overly electronic, no-faces-seen world, it's easy to forget there are real people behind the ideas and suggestions. I'm not saying we all have to agree all the time on everything--far from that. I just hope that we can be respectful of each other's ideas and give frank and constructive criticism and even a few Kudos!
When I did a Google search for 'integritist', the only questionably reliable source for a definition I received was on urbandictionary.com. If people are so blind as to choose that term to re-brand ourselves, then that will be the final straw in my having anything to do with this association and I will let my CMT lapse.
And just because some of the comments have been snide or "snarky," does not mean that they don't have a VERY VALID point. That has been the crux of the problem with this association since I joined in 2001...if the head honchos don't like what they hear, they choose to ignore it. AAMT anyone?
I don't believe I invalidated anyone's opinion expressed here. Neither did I want to invalidate the opinion of your fellow AHDI member who proposed the idea (or the other committee members who agreed to put it on the survey). It's easy to forget that the ideas and opinions expressed by "leadership" are ideas and opinions of other MTs that are probably no different than you. They care about the profession, they care about the industry that puts food on their table, and it matters to them enough to speak up and to volunteer.